It’s become clear to many that Red Hat’s recent missteps with CentOS and the availability of RHEL source code indicate that it’s fallen from its respected place as “the open organization.” SUSE seems to be poised to benefit from Red Hat’s errors. We connect the dots.

    • Ananace@lemmy.ananace.dev
      10·
      5 months ago

      Not at all what my point was. There’s indeed plenty of Open-something (or Libre-something) projects under the sun, but no free/open spins of commercial projects named simply “Open<Trademarked company name / commercial offering>”.

      • DigitalDilemma@lemmy.mlEnglish
        5·
        5 months ago

        Definitely getting into pedantry now, sorry - but OpenSuse isn’t strictly a free version of Suse. Like RHEL, there are some proprietary and commercially restricted software in Suse that doesn’t reappear - verbatim - in OpenSuse.

        • Ananace@lemmy.ananace.dev
          1·
          5 months ago

          And it’s still entirely unrelated to my point, since SUSE will remain the trademark in question regardless of what’s actually contained in OpenSUSE.

          But yes, the free/open-source spins of things tend to have somewhat differing content compared to the commercial offering, usually for licensing or support reasons.
          E.g. CentOS (when it still was a real thing)/AlmaLinux/etc supporting hardware that regular RHEL has dropped support for, while also not distributing core RedHat components like the subscription manager.

    • psvrh@lemmy.ca
      21·
      5 months ago
      • OpenLook
      • OpenMotif
      • OpenTransport on MacOS
      • SCO OpenServer
      • HP OpenMail
      • HP OpenView

      You couldn’t throw a ball without hitting something branded as “Open” in that era.